Kaki Narayana vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6270 Tel

 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

               WRIT PETITION No. 26070 OF 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to

declare the action of respondent No.4 in mutating the name of

respondent No.5 in the Revenue records in respect of land situated

in Sy.Nos.276, 278, and 279 admeasuring Acs.12.26 gts.,

Acs.1.17 gts., and Acs.4.27 gts., respectively of Kongara Kalan

Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal , Ranga Reddy District and issuing

Pattadar Pass Book bearing No.T05090010223 and also sought for

a consequential direction to set aside the mutation proceedings

and the Pattadar Pass Book in question.

2. Heard Sri Vijay B.Paropkari, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Dammalapati Sreenivas, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for Sri Rohit Pogula, learned counsel for respondent

Nos.6 and 7 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 4. None appeared for respondent

No.5.

                                    2                                MSK,J
                                                             wp_26070_2021

3. Before considering the controversy involved in the present

Writ Petition, it is necessary to refer to certain admitted facts of the

case.

4. The subject land was subjected to Land Ceiling proceedings

under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural

Holdings) Act, 1975 (for short 'the Ceiling Act,1975), and the same

was declared as Ceiling surplus land at the instance of the original

land owner. The father of the petitioner and respondent No.5

herein namely Kaki Ramaiah, who was the protected tenant in

respect of the subject land. At the instance of legal heirs of Kaki

Ramaiah, the original protected tenant, the subject land is

excluded from the proceedings under the Ceiling Act, 1975. The

sons of late Kaki Ramaiah, that is the petitioner herein, respondent

No.5 and another person by name Kaki Chakrapani were granted a

joint Ownership Right Certificate (ORC) under Section 38(E) of the

Telangana Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short 'the

Act, 1950'), through proceedings No.L/797/2020, dated

29.06.2020. Though, various other proceedings have taken place

under the Ceiling Act, 1975, they have no much relevance to the

issue involved in this Writ Petition as the subject property is 3 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

already deleted from the holdings of original land owner and

ownership certificate under Section 38(E) of the Act, 1950, which

was already granted as noted above. The petitioner herein,

respondent No.5 and the other brother namely Kaki Chakrapani

have jointly executed two (02) sale deeds, dated 07.07.2020 and

07.07.2020 in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 for an extent of

Acs.3.30 gts., and Acs.15.00 gts., respectively, thereby covering the

entire extent of the land which is the subject matter of this Writ

Petition. It is also not in dispute that though the said two (02) sale

deeds executed by the three (03) sons of late Kaki Ramaiah were

refused to be registered initially and were returned, the said

documents were registered by the Sub-Registrar, Ibrahimpatnam,

Rangareddy District on 08.12.2021 and 13.12.2021 and were

assigned registered document Nos.19577 of 2021 and 19800 of

2021. The registration of the said documents was carried out

pursuant to an interim order passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of

2021 in W.P.No.28545 of 2021, dated 24.11.2021. The said order

in I.A.No.1 of 2021, dated 24.11.2021 came to be set aside by a

Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.

653 of 2021 and the Writ Petition No.28545 of 2021 is pending 4 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

consideration before this Court. It is also on record that the

petitioner herein filed O.S.No.320 of 2021 on the file of Court of the

Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District, at L.B.Nagar

seeking injunction against respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein and

another in respect of subject property and the same is pending,

adjudication.

5. In the light of the above admitted and undisputed facts, the

issue involved in the present Writ Petition is required to be

considered.

6. As already noted above, the relief that is sought in the

present Writ Petition is in respect of the mutation that is said to

have been affected in favour of respondent No.5 herein in the

Revenue records in respect of the subject property and issue a

consequential Pattadar Pass Book thereon. From the averments

made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is

noticed that the petitioner suppressed the fact, that he along with

his two (02) other brothers that is respondent No.5 and

Kaki Chakrapani have jointly executed the two (02) sale deeds in

favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 covering the entire extent of land

which is the subject matter of this Writ Petition. Suppressing the 5 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

said fact, the petitioner herein filed the present Writ Petition as

though the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 have joint

interest in the subject property along with Kaki Chakrapani. After

respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein filed an implead application,

learned counsel for the petitioners herein has expressed his no

objection for respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein to come on record and

accordingly, the same was ordered. After the respondent Nos.6 and

7 herein brought to the notice of this Court through the Vacate

Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof, about execution

of two (02) sale deeds as noted above, the learned counsel for the

petitioner admitted about execution of the above refereed two (02)

sale deeds by the petitioner herein, respondent No.5 and their

brother Kaki Chakrapani and also, about the registration of the

said documents as noted hereinabove.

7. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended

that registration of the said two (02) sale deeds is pursuant to an

interim order passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in

W.P.No.28545 of 2021, which order came to be set aside by a

Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.653 of 2021 and

thus, contended that the said registration affected by virtue of the 6 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

interim order referred to the above has no validity and such

registration would be subject to result of the said Writ Petition

No.28545 of 2021. The execution of the two (02) sale deeds as early

as on 07.07.2020 and their presentation for registration before the

concerned Sub-Registrar by the petitioner and others is not

disputed. The only dispute is about the subsequent registration of

the subject document pursuant to an interim order passed by this

Court.

8. The fact remains that the said two (02) registered documents

are registered and said registration is not disturbed as on today.

Though, vaguely an averment is made that the cheques that were

issued under the said sale deeds are bounced, no substantial

proceedings seeking to avoid the said sale deeds or for recovery of

any such sale consideration are initiated as on date. The

proceedings that are initiated by the petitioner herein is only by

filing O.S.N.320 of 2021, that too seeking permanent injunction

against respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein and another. Thus the sale

deeds executed by the petitioner herein along with others remained

unchallenged as on date. In the absence of any challenge to the

said two (02) sale deeds referred to above, any claim of the 7 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

petitioner over the subject land is totally without any right and title

over the said property. As already noted above, respondent No.5

herein has not chosen to enter appearance and contest the matter.

Neither the petitioner herein nor respondent No.5 herein can be

said to be having any subsisting right over the subject property so

long as the sale deeds, dated 07.07.2020, executed by them

remained unchallenged. The validity of registration of the sale

deeds on 08.12.2021 and 13.12.2021 is the subject matter of

another Writ Petition bearing W.P.No.28545 of 2021 pending before

this Court and the same cannot be gone into or adjudicated in this

Writ Petition. Thus the attempt made by the petitioner and the

relief sought in the present Writ Petition appears to be in active

collision with respondent No.5 to the detriment of respondent

Nos.6 and 7 herein, who are the beneficiaries under the above

referred two (02) sale deeds, or may be the respondent No.5 felt

that he has no interest in the subject land as he has already

executed sale deeds in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7.

9. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted

above, this Court is of the considered view that this Writ Petition is

liable to be dismissed, firstly, on the ground of suppression of facts 8 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

and secondly, for want of petitioner having any subsisting interest

in the subject property. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.6

and 7 placed reliance on various judgments in support of the

contention of suppression of facts by the petitioner. In the case of

K.D.Sharma V/s Steel Authority of India Limited and others1

and the case of Dalip Singh V/s The state of Uttar Pradesh2 and

others and another case in Oswal Fats and Oils Limited V/s

Additional Commissioner (Administration), Bareilly Division3.

As it is a settled legal position that the discretionary relief under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be exercised in

favour of a person who approached this Court by suppressing the

material facts and with uncleaned hands, there is no necessity to

refer in detail to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

the above referred Judgments.

10. In the light of the above, this Court does not find any merit

in the Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, the validity or

otherwise of the registered sale deeds vide the document

Nos.19577 of 2021 and 19800 of 2021 is left open to be decided in

(2008) 12 SCC 481

(2010) 2 SCC 114

(2010) 4 SCC 728 9 MSK,J wp_26070_2021

W.P.No.28545 of 2021, and in case if the petitioner has got any

grievance against the said two (02) sale deeds, it is open for the

petitioner to pursue all such remedies that may be available to the

petitioner in accordance with law.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any in this

Writ Petition, shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to

costs.

                                  __________________________________
                                 MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J


Date:30.11.2022
Nds
                          10                        MSK,J
                                            wp_26070_2021

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No. 26070 OF 2021

Date:30.11.2022

Nds